Can Homeland Security Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas Be Impeached for Incompetence?

There's no doubt that Homeland Security Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas has acted incompetently in executing the duties of his office. There have been a record number of illegal alien border crossings, and Mayorkas has refused to push back against Joe Biden's insane policies.

Mayorkas has also acted dishonestly in the performance of his duties. He knew that allegations that his border guards were whipping illegal aliens were bogus, yet he threw his people under the bus to protect his boss, Joe Biden. Shame on him for that.

But as conservative law professor Jonathan Turley points out in an op-ed in the Daily Beast, being incompetent at one's job is not a "high crime" and is therefore not impeachable.

"He’s bad at his job and is enforcing wrongheaded Biden administration border policies, but there is no current evidence he is corrupt or committed an impeachable offense," Turley writes.

The only cabinet secretary ever impeached was Secretary of War William Belknap in 1876. He was caught up in the "Indian Ring" scandal where he profited off the sale of trading post rights at Western forts.

Obviously, it's not easy to impeach a cabinet member unless his hands have been caught in the cookie jar. And while Mayorkas may be a liar, a fool, and an incompetent idiot, he has committed no impeachable offense that we currently know of.

It might have been different if, as Turley points out, the founders had adopted a slightly different standard for impeachment.

During the Constitutional Convention, there was a debate over the grounds for impeachment with George Mason arguing for a broad scope of offenses that could “subvert the Constitution.” His view was rejected. Most notably, there was a rejection of “maladministration” as a basis for impeachment.

An English trial of Warren Hastings weighed heavily on the forging of the impeachment standard. The former governor of India was charged with various offenses including “mismanagement and misgovernment... and mistreatment of various provinces.” While figures like Mason saw the need for the adoption of a similarly broad definition, his suggestion of maladministration was rejected as too broad.

Meanwhile. Senate Republicans are taking a dim view of the Mayorkas impeachment drive.

Axios:

I haven't seen the Constitutional standard met yet. We'll see what they find in their investigation," said Sen. Mitt Romney (R-Utah).

Romney added: "From what I can tell, he's carrying out the policies of his boss, the president, for which you don't impeach the secretary."

"I've got to see what their evidence is," said Sen. Shelley Moore Capito (R-W.Va.), a perennial skeptic of House GOP impeachment efforts.

"Oh my gosh," exclaimed Sen. Lisa Murkowski (R-Alaska) when asked about the effort to impeach Mayorkas. "We have some things to do. I'd like us all to be working really fast on appropriations."

Sen. Tommy Tuberville (R-Ala.) said impeachment is a "waste of time" unless it's targeting Biden and predicted Senate Democrats won't hold a trial anyway, arguing Republicans should instead make their case directly to the public: "This is an election year, we can solve a lot of those problems in 10 months."

Instead of impeaching Mayorkas, Sen. Roger Marshall (R-Kan.) wanted to offer a resolution of "no confidence" in Mayorkas. But Democrats blocked the measure from coming to the floor for a vote.

One thing Republicans should consider. Even if they're successful in removing Mayorkas, Biden will simply put another person in office to carry out exactly the same policies.

Perhaps it would be wiser to work like hell for the next 10 months to beat Joe Biden instead of wasting time trying to impeach a cabinet member who has committed no impeachable offense.